(Editor's note, 12:30 p.m. EST: Gary Klein's comments on this issue are now below, in blue.)
Is there a problem with the how Bassmaster Elite 50 points are allocated? More to the point, when two or more Top 12 anglers zero, do they get too many points? Even though BASS says no, it looks like the answer might be yes.
And with not one but two Bassmaster Classic berths on the line in this year's now-finished E50s, the question is very important. Especially for Gary Klein, who as of now is the first man out of the Classic from the E50s.
A Little Background
Before getting into the ins and outs of this, here's a quick refresher on some background material.
- Last year (2004) was the first year of BASS's new "BASCAR," or NASCAR-like, point system. This system, which remains in effect for Bassmaster Tour and E50 events, gives 300 points to the winner, then points decrease in five-point increments to 5th place, four-point increments through 10th place, three-point increments through 15th place, two-point increments to 99th place and one-point increments for the remainder of the field.
- But after just the second Tour event in the 2004 season, the Smith Lake Bassmaster in February, BASS changed its new points system. What happened was that so many fishermen zeroed over the first 2 days at Smith (28 anglers total), the bottom of the field all finished in 130th place and got 46 points – after catching no fish. Many anglers got upset that those fishermen got points even though they caught no fish. So BASS quickly changed how points were allocated for zeroes, stating: "The current point structure will remain intact. However, as in the past, anglers who fail to catch a fish will receive no points." That changed a rule during the season, and it hurt some anglers and helped others, but overall was a change embraced by the anglers: No fish, no points.
That brings us to the E50s.
In the last two E50s (Lewisville and Wissota), at least two anglers who made the Top 12 cut did not catch a fish on day 3. Here's the list, with points in bold:
Lewisville
11. Dustin Wilks -- Rocky Mount, N.C. -- 0, 0-00 -- 257 -- $6,100
Day 1: 5, 13-02 -- Day 2: 5, 12-05 -- Day 3: 0, 0-00
11. Kevin Wirth -- Crestwood, Ky. -- 0, 0-00 -- 257 -- $6,100
Day 1: 5, 12-04 -- Day 2: 5, 12-14 -- Day 3: 0, 0-00
Wissota
10. Rick Clunn -- Ava, Mo. -- 0, 0-00 -- 260 -- $6,200
Day 1: 3, 5-05 -- Day 2: 2, 4-00 -- Day 3: 0, 0-00
10. Randy Howell -- Springville, Ala. -- 0, 0-00 -- 260 -- $6,200
Day 1: 4, 7-04 -- Day 2: 1, 1-15 -- Day 3: 0, 0-00
10. Mike Wurm -- Hot Springs, Ark. -- 0 -- 0-00 -- 260 -- $8,200
Day 1: 3, 8-02 -- Day 2: 0, 0-00 -- Day 3: 0, 0-00
Note that the 10th-place points, net any leader bonuses, are 260 and 11th-place points are 257. Twelfth-place points would be 254.
And remember this key point: In the E50s, the Top 12 anglers start day 3 at zero. It's as if they never caught a fish on days 1 and 2. So for the purpose of place and points (sort of), it's a new tournament.
The Issue
So the question is, how is it that the above guys caught no fish and didn't get the minimum amount of points allowable (254 for 12th)? That seems to be the precedent BASS set at Smith Lake.
Why does it matter? First, there's the matter of consistency – or in this case, maybe inconsistency – in how rules are applied. And second, with two Classics on the line, every point counts. Remember that the Top 10 anglers from the 2005 E50 points qualify for both the 2005 and 2006 Classics.
Affected Anglers
If you were to give 12th-place points to the above anglers, that means you'd take away 3 points from the 11th-place finishers at Lewisville, and you'd take away 6 points from the 10th-place finishers at Wissota.
Subtract 3 points from Dustin Wilks (who finished 16th in the E50 points) and Kevin Wirth (he finished 42nd in the points), and there's no Classic effect. Same goes for taking 6 points away from Randy Howell (14th) and Mike Wurm (17th).
But take 6 points away from Rick Clunn, who finished tied for 9th with Larry Nixon in the E50 points, and that's where things get interesting.
By finishing 20th in the 2005 Bassmaster Tour points, Clunn qualified for the 2005 Classic. And by finishing tied for 9th in the E50 points, he qualified for the 2005 and 2006 Classics.
That double-qualification for this year's Classic means he enabled someone else to get in. Remember that BASS qualifies anglers off the E50 points list first, and for each double-qualifier (on the E50s and the Tour), BASS goes an additional place down the Tour points list to bring someone else into the Classic.
Nixon finished 39th in the Tour points and thus the E50s are his only way into the 2005 Classic. Regardless, he is not affected here. But Clunn and Klein are.
Klein had a bad year on the Tour (he finished 85th in the points), but finished 11th in this year's E50 points – exactly 6 points behind Nixon and Clunn. So if Clunn lost 6 points – in other words, if he got 12th-place points instead of 10th-place points after zeroing on day 3 at Wissota – Nixon would stand alone in 9th in the E50 season points, and Klein and Clunn would tie for 10th.
According to BASS, the tiebreaker for year-end points is total weight over full-field days (days 1 and 2) only – weights earned on cut days do not count. Here's how those weights shook out:
| Lake | Clunn | Klein |
|---|---|---|
| Wissota | 9-05 | 4-11 |
| Lewisville | 20-06 | 21-10 |
| Dardanelle | 24-15 | 28-05 |
| Smith | 17-03 | 19-07 |
| TOTALS | 71-13 | 74-01 |
So if Clunn had gotten 12th-place points – the minimum number of points allowed for making a Top 12 cut – after he and other anglers zeroed, he still would be fishing the 2005 Classic. But he would have to qualify for the 2006 Classic. And Klein would be in both Classics.
Well?
Should BASS make a fix? Depends on how you look at it.
BASS tournament director Trip Weldon told BassFan: "The rules state that an angler must weigh fish to receive points. Anglers who zeroed after the cut at Lake Wissota are still able to receive points due to their weighed fish on the first 2 days of competition. They split 10th-, 11th- and 12th-place monies, and all received 10th-place points. This is consistent with what BASS has always done."
True, but that is consistent with what BASS has always done when weights were not zeroed after 2 days. That's the wrinkle here.
Look at it this way: What if the fishing at Wissota (or another E50 or Major) was so bad that on day 3 only six of the Top 12 caught fish. Should the 7th- through 12th-place anglers all finish 7th and get 7th-place points? After all, there's a good possibility that some of the anglers who finished 7th were lower than 7th in the standings after day 2. So they will have advanced in place and points for catching no fish.
That breaks down to: no fish, more points – and in fact, this happened to Mike Wurm at Wissota. Wurm was 11th after day 2, then zeroed on day 3 and actually gained one place and 3 points.
How about a more extreme example: Say only three of the Top 12 anglers on day 3 catch fish. Should the rest of the anglers end up 4th and get 4th-place points? If so, most of those anglers will have advanced in place and points – some significantly, and three also presumably making the Top 6 cut through some form of tiebreaker – for catching no fish.
That would break down to: no fish, more points, some make the cut too.
Given BASS's point system and how it has been applied (there doesn't appear to be a written rule that specifically addresses this situation), a better solution in that case would seem to be to have all the anglers who zeroed finish 4th, but only get 12th-place points.
Last but not least, this year is an extreme situation. Two Classics are on the line. And while it's tough to imagine anything more important than that, there could be. If so, this scenario could actually be worse.
Klein: BASS didn't get it right
Klein said: "The only thing I can say is what my appeal was about, and that is the fact that I don't understand how an angler can advance without catching a fish. How can an angler gain points or be awarded points without catching a fish?"
How does he feel about it? "It's hard for me to accept. All I wanted was for BASS to get it right, and I just don't think they have it right.
"The bottom line is that I'm a competitor, and I look forward to going out next year and not putting myself in that position ever again."
Notable
> Since Clunn was the lowest angler in the Tour points to double-qualify for the Bassmaster Classic, his double-qualifying means that California rookie Greg Gutierrez gets in the Classic. Were Clunn to not double-qualify, Gutierrez, who finished 31st in the Tour points, would be the first man out.
What do you think about this? Click here to let us know.
